Updated The Bruce Lehrmann Trials * Justice Lee - "Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins."

[Kurve]

Historical Rape Allegation Against Fmr AG Christian Porter
The Alexander Matters matters

Just a reminder, this is the crime board and we need to be aware that there will be victims of crime either watching this thread or engaging in here from time to time. A degree of respect in all discussions is expected.

LINK TO TIMELINE
CJS INQUIRY
FINAL REPORT – BOARD OF INQUIRY – CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Joint media statement – Chief Minister and Attorney-General

LINK TO FEDERAL COURT DEFAMATION PROCEEDINGS

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Lol. Yeah he is just an innocent persecuted man .lol

i really dont think you are up for this discussion.....

 

[Big_Birdy]

Ok forget the juror , let's just say he was a moron.
Do you really think, with all the evidence and collusion, Lerhman may be innocent?

Stop referring to the juror as he. You don't have a clue as to their sex.

Yes he may be innocent. The evidence, of which there is little, could suggest a sexual assault. But there are also perfectly innocent explanations for the evidence presented to the court, excluding the testimony of Brittany Higgins.

 

[Kwality]

Interesting but why is it relevant ?

 

[Kwality]

Survivors would have greater likelihood of getting a conviction if they went straight to hospital and the police. Unfortunately after such a traumatic experience that's not always a reasonable expectation. People need to be educated but I believe the requirments for change go further than that and extend to the justice system. Possibly formal acknowldgement that primary evidence may be circumstantial, judge-only trials, and majority verdict by jury, not requiring unanimous verdicts, just for starters, but I'm no legal expert. There needs to be a formal enquiry IMO.

One thing we both agree on is that it isn't easy.

The Higgins behaviour would be THE 'dont do it this way' case study.

For example: Higgins 'not ashamed' of speaking to media - Australian Associated Press

'Ms Higgins said once she had spoken to journalists Samantha Maiden and Lisa Wilkinson about her allegations the story became outside of her control.

“It became not even about me or my story, it became about them (the journalists),” she said.

“Once I’d given an on-the-record interview … it was out of my control … it was up to them.”

Mr Whybrow put to Ms Higgins a timeline of events she had written was prepared for the media rather than for the police.

Ms Higgins originally wrote it for the police but it was given to particular journalists when she and her partner David Sharaz were overwhelmed with media inquiries.

She said those journalists then circulated the dossier to others, which was a “breach of trust”.

Mr Whybrow put to Ms Higgins police had told her media reporting could jeopardise the case.

Ms Higgins thought she would do one print and one television interview about her experience and then never talk about it again.

She also did not think police would prosecute her argument or that the matter would end up in court.

“I thought I’d go back to uni and disappear,” she said.

Ms Higgins told the court she originally did not go ahead with a police complaint in 2019, when the alleged rape happened, because she feared she would lose her job.

After dreaming of becoming a political media adviser, Ms Higgins feared she would lose that opportunity if she made a police complaint.

“My interpretation of that was that if I raised it with police there were going to be problems.”

She wanted to keep working for the Liberals and assist during the federal election but also wanted to proceed with the complaint.'


So many decisions made by Ms Higgins on strategy ..........

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

The Higgins behaviour would be THE 'dont do it this way' case study.

For example: Higgins 'not ashamed' of speaking to media - Australian Associated Press

'Ms Higgins said once she had spoken to journalists Samantha Maiden and Lisa Wilkinson about her allegations the story became outside of her control.

“It became not even about me or my story, it became about them (the journalists),” she said.

“Once I’d given an on-the-record interview … it was out of my control … it was up to them.”

Mr Whybrow put to Ms Higgins a timeline of events she had written was prepared for the media rather than for the police.

Ms Higgins originally wrote it for the police but it was given to particular journalists when she and her partner David Sharaz were overwhelmed with media inquiries.

She said those journalists then circulated the dossier to others, which was a “breach of trust”.

Mr Whybrow put to Ms Higgins police had told her media reporting could jeopardise the case.

Ms Higgins thought she would do one print and one television interview about her experience and then never talk about it again.

She also did not think police would prosecute her argument or that the matter would end up in court.

“I thought I’d go back to uni and disappear,” she said.

Ms Higgins told the court she originally did not go ahead with a police complaint in 2019, when the alleged rape happened, because she feared she would lose her job.

After dreaming of becoming a political media adviser, Ms Higgins feared she would lose that opportunity if she made a police complaint.

“My interpretation of that was that if I raised it with police there were going to be problems.”

She wanted to keep working for the Liberals and assist during the federal election but also wanted to proceed with the complaint.'


So many decisions made by Ms Higgins on strategy ..........

A bit too much victim blaming from you. You don't think of strategy if you've been raped. Tricky lawyers and the Linda Reynolds cover up job won the day.

 

[Wooden Robot]

We don't know how many in the jury had him guilty ,they may well have been close to a guilty verdict.
One of the jurors was corrupt yes.
We all know what happened. The jury were fed a utensil and bull story by very expensive lawyers who were supported by Linda Reynolds, the liberal party and the AFP.
Lehrman is a grub with past history, Higgins is of honest character.
Wait till other women take him to court and wait until the info in the Reynolds trial comes out.
If you can't see what's happening by now you'll pribably never change your mind.

Can easily be rephrased as thus .. We don’t know how many in the jury has him guilty, they may well have been close to a not guilty verdict

 

[Wooden Robot]

If, after six hours, eight jurors determine that there is reasonable doubt to guilt you are going home - that is sufficient doubt in the mind of a reasonable person. To still be there on the fourth day suggests that 10 or 11 people found him to be guilty of the crime, based on the facts.

We don’t know … only Aristotle knows, apparently.

 

[Kwality]

The police unions in Australia are as dodgy as, constantly defending dodgy cops , racist cops and gun happy cops.

Unions represent their members - love 'em or hate them, they need to maintain the financial support of their members including when they are under fire/when accused ....

Police union hits back at ACT's top prosecutor after he criticised officers' actions during Bruce Lehrmann trial

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold draws the ire of the Australian Federal Police Association after his letter criticising police actions in the now-abandoned trial of Bruce Lehrmann was made public.

www.abc.net.au

'In a statement, Australian Federal Police Association (AFPA) president Alex Caruana said a full judicial inquiry was necessary and could be accompanied by a referral to the ACT Integrity Commission or the Commonwealth Ombudsman if that inquiry found any misconduct by any party.

Mr Caruana said the inquiry should also examine the conduct of Mr Drumgold, the DPP, ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner Heidi Yates and ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury.

Mr Caruana added he was concerned about how the letter came to be in the public domain.

"The AFPA will make a formal complaint to the Office of the Australian Information Commission and the ACT Ombudsman regarding the possibility of FOI breaches and misconduct [by] the Director of Public Prosecutions," he said. '

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

Unions represent their members - love 'em or hate them, they need to maintain the financial support of their members.

Police union hits back at ACT's top prosecutor after he criticised officers' actions during Bruce Lehrmann trial

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold draws the ire of the Australian Federal Police Association after his letter criticising police actions in the now-abandoned trial of Bruce Lehrmann was made public.

www.abc.net.au

'In a statement, Australian Federal Police Association (AFPA) president Alex Caruana said a full judicial inquiry was necessary and could be accompanied by a referral to the ACT Integrity Commission or the Commonwealth Ombudsman if that inquiry found any misconduct by any party.

Mr Caruana said the inquiry should also examine the conduct of Mr Drumgold, the DPP, ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner Heidi Yates and ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury.

Mr Caruana added he was concerned about how the letter came to be in the public domain.

"The AFPA will make a formal complaint to the Office of the Australian Information Commission and the ACT Ombudsman regarding the possibility of FOI breaches and misconduct [by] the Director of Public Prosecutions," he said. '

Side with corrupt cops if you want. The fact that will defend any cop for anything means their opinion means zero.

 

[Nikita Blue]

 

[Kwality]

A bit too much victim blaming from you. You don't think of strategy if you've been raped. Tricky lawyers and the Linda Reynolds cover up job won the day.

Rubbish - Ms Higgins made decisions i.e chose her actions. That I call that 'strategy' offends some here.

IF you want to see examples of the decisions made, see here:

Higgins 'not ashamed' of speaking to media - Australian Associated Press

A jury has heard Brittany Higgins felt pressure not to proceed with a police complaint against her alleged rapist because it could impact the Liberal Party.

www.aap.com.au

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

Rubbish - Ms Higgins made decisions i.e chose her actions. That I call that 'strategy' offends some here.

IF you want to see examples of the decisions made, see here:

Higgins 'not ashamed' of speaking to media - Australian Associated Press

A jury has heard Brittany Higgins felt pressure not to proceed with a police complaint against her alleged rapist because it could impact the Liberal Party.

www.aap.com.au

Defence lawyer Steven Whybrow is a scumbag.
Stop attacking the rape victim

 

[Kwality]

Side with corrupt cops if you want. The fact that will defend any cop for anything means their opinion means zero.

Nonsense. I pointed out the role of the Union doing its job, as unpalatable as that may be in your good/bad world.

If Ms Yates was involved in the DPP decision, it should be cause for concern.

Victims of Crime Commissioner - ACT Human Rights Commission

Hello my name is Heidi Yates and I am the Victims of Crime Commissioner for the ACT. I also oversee the day-to-day functioning of Victim Support ACT – including the ACT Victims of Crime Financial Assistance Scheme. My role is to promote and protect the rights of people who experience crime and...

hrc.act.gov.au

 

[Kurve]

If Ms Yates was involved in the DPP decision, it should be cause for concern.

Yates was doing her job, no cause for concern.

 

[Kwality]

Yates was doing her job, no cause for concern.

You dont see her advising the DPP on whether or not to abandon the trial as a potential conflict of interest?

 

[Kurve]

You dont see her advising the DPP on whether or not to abandon the trial as a potential conflict of interest?

If Yates gave that advice from her position, no.

 

[Festerz]

You dont see her advising the DPP on whether or not to abandon the trial as a potential conflict of interest?

WTF.

Where is the conflict of interest in a Commissioner, whose role is (inter alia):

'advocating for individuals who experience crime' ;and

'working with the criminal justice system to ensure that people who experience crime are treated in accordance with the governing principles for the treatment of victims of crime'.

liaising with the DPP on behalf of an alleged victim in a rape trial?

You either do not understand the term 'conflict of interest' or what the legislated role of the ACT Commissioner for Victims of Crime is. Most probably both.

 

[Kurve]

Nonsense. I pointed out the role of the Union doing its job, as unpalatable as that may be in your good/bad world.

If Ms Yates was involved in the DPP decision, it should be cause for concern.

Victims of Crime Commissioner - ACT Human Rights Commission

Hello my name is Heidi Yates and I am the Victims of Crime Commissioner for the ACT. I also oversee the day-to-day functioning of Victim Support ACT – including the ACT Victims of Crime Financial Assistance Scheme. My role is to promote and protect the rights of people who experience crime and...

hrc.act.gov.au

You're derailing the discussion with this rubbish when the breaking news is that the AFP are to be examined by the integrity watchdog.

 

[Festerz]

You're derailing the discussion with this rubbish when the breaking news is that the AFP are to be examined by the integrity watchdog.

Yep.

Shane Rattenbury, the ACT’s attorney general has confirmed that the matter had been referred to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity – the integrity and corruption watchdog that oversees the Australian federal police and other agencies.

“I am aware the matter has been referred to Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity,” he said. “As such, it is not appropriate to comment further at this time.”

The DPP and ACT Policing had already revealed that an inquiry was under way, but did not specify which agency was conducting it.

Integrity watchdog to examine allegations of police misconduct during Bruce Lehrmann case

ACT attorney general says complaints surrounding prosecution of Brittany Higgins allegation referred to federal integrity and corruption commission

www.theguardian.com

 

[Kwality]

The referall is designed to close down the discussion.
Good luck with the constant source of material Ms Higgins.

 

[Kwality]

WTF.

Where is the conflict of interest in a Commissioner, whose role is (inter alia):

'advocating for individuals who experience crime' ;and

'working with the criminal justice system to ensure that people who experience crime are treated in accordance with the governing principles for the treatment of victims of crime'.

liaising with the DPP on behalf of an alleged victim in a rape trial?

You either do not understand the term 'conflict of interest' or what the legislated role of the ACT Commissioner for Victims of Crime is. Most probably both.

We arent winning this, pull the pin or other words to the same effect.

 

[Golden_6]

Interesting but why is it relevant ?

Why were they doing it for free? Now obviously everybody is entitled to legal representation.

I'd say it was in the Liberal party's absolute best interest that Lehrmann was acquitted or at least not found guilty of the crime from a pure political standpoint. Now I could be completely off but I just feel like behind the scenes they would have poured a whole bunch of resources into defending this case.

 

[Festerz]

Great article for those wanting the lowdown on how a defamation trial differs from a criminal trial for Mr Lehrmann (apart from the obvious difference - Bruce Lehrmann can't stay mute this time around):

If Bruce Lehrmann proceeds with defamation action, how would it differ from the aborted criminal case? | Dean Levitan

While Australia’s defamation laws are notoriously slanted in favour of plaintiffs, Lehrmann would need to overcome a number of obstacles

www.theguardian.com

 

[HirdsTheWord]

If, after six hours, eight jurors determine that there is reasonable doubt to guilt you are going home - that is sufficient doubt in the mind of a reasonable person. To still be there on the fourth day suggests that 10 or 11 people found him to be guilty of the crime, based on the facts.

that is a complete assumption.

 

[Kurve]

Great article for those wanting the lowdown on how a defamation trial differs from a criminal trial for Mr Lehrmann:

If Bruce Lehrmann proceeds with defamation action, how would it differ from the aborted criminal case? | Dean Levitan

While Australia’s defamation laws are notoriously slanted in favour of plaintiffs, Lehrmann would need to overcome a number of obstacles

www.theguardian.com

Interesting. Lehrmann's in a position now where the risk of a prison term is removed so he probably thinks he has nothing really to lose, particularly if he doesn't have to pay a team of lawyers out of his own pocket.

Lehrmann would not be entitled to the right to silence in his defamation case – a right he exercised as the accused in the criminal case. In defamation cases, the plaintiff must give evidence, at least if they seek damages and vindication for the harm alleged to have been caused to their reputation. If the defendants seek to prove the truth of the imputations arising from their publications, Lehrmann would, in all likelihood, need to give detailed evidence in order to defeat the truth defence, including about what happened on the night on which it was alleged (and about which he consistently and vehemently denies) that he raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House. By taking the witness stand, he would inevitably be subject to extensive cross-examination by a barrister acting for the defendants about these matters.

If Bruce Lehrmann proceeds with defamation action, how would it differ from the aborted criminal case? | Dean Levitan

While Australia’s defamation laws are notoriously slanted in favour of plaintiffs, Lehrmann would need to overcome a number of obstacles

www.theguardian.com